Is the three-quark confinement potential better described by the Y-string or the ∆-string form? We have re-analysed the recent lattice QCD calculations and the older results using hyper-spherical three-body variables. The presently available lattice data do not give a conclusive answer to the above question. We briefly discuss sources of uncertainties in these calculations, the ways to reduce them, and how to avoid them.

No abstract

We have re-analysed the lattice QCD calculations of the 3-quark potentials by: (i) Sakumichi and Suganuma (Phys Rev D 92(3), 034511, 2015); and (ii) Koma and Koma (Phys Rev D 95(9), 094513, 2017) using hyperspherical variables. We find that: (1) the two sets of lattice results have only two common sets of 3-quark geometries: (a) the isosceles, and (b) the right-angled triangles; (2) both sets of results are subject to unaccounted for deviations from smooth curves that are largest near the equilateral triangle geometry and are function of the hyperradius – the deviations being much larger and extending further in the triangle shape space in Sakumichi and Suganuma’s than in Koma and Koma’s data; (3) the variation of Sakumichi and Suganuma’s results brackets, from above and below, the Koma and Koma’s ones; the latter will be used as the benchmark; (4) this benchmark result generally passes between the Y- and the $$\Delta $$ Δ -string predictions, thus excluding both; (5) three pieces of elastic strings joined at a skewed junction, which lies on the Euler line, reproduce such a potential, within the region where the data sets agree, in qualitative agreement with the calculations of colour flux density by Bissey et al. (Phys Rev D 76, 114512, 2007).